חולין 25 — Soncino English Talmud

¹even though it is filled with mustard seed. R. Ada b. Ahabah asked Raba: Should not an earthenware vessel be rendered unclean [by contact] from the outside by the following a fortiori argument: If all other vessels which are not rendered unclean through their air-space are nevertheless rendered unclean from the outside, an earthenware vessel which is rendered unclean through its air-space should surely be rendered unclean from the outside? — He replied: The verse reads: And every open vessel, which has no covering close-bound upon it, is unclean. Now what kind of vessel is it to which uncleanness comes first through its opening? You must say: It is an earthenware vessel. And [the verse teaches that] if it has no covering close-bound upon it is unclean, but if it has a covering close-bound upon it it is clean. And should not all other vessels be rendered unclean through their air-space by the following a fortiori argument: If an earthenware vessel which is not rendered unclean from the outside is nevertheless rendered unclean through its air-space, all other vessels which are rendered unclean from the outside should surely be rendered unclean through their air-space? — The verse says: In it [toko], meaning the air-space of this [can suffer uncleanness] but the air-space of no other [can suffer uncleanness]. But have we not already interpreted these [terms] toko for other purposes? Indeed, four expositions may be derived from ‘toko’, by reason of ‘toko-tok’, ‘toko-tok’: one [is required] for [the rule of] the text itself; another for the analogy; and again another for [the rule that] the air-space of this [vessel can suffer uncleanness], and not the air-space of any other [vessel]; and again another for [the rule that] the air-space of this [vessel can suffer uncleanness], and not the air-space [of another vessel] which is within the air-space [of this vessel]; hence even a rinsable vessel is a protection [against uncleanness]. [One might argue that] all other vessels should not be rendered unclean [by contact] from the outside, but only by contact from the inside, by the following a fortiori argument: If an earthenware vessel which is rendered unclean through its air-space is nevertheless not rendered unclean from the outside, all other vessels which are not rendered unclean through their air-space should surely not be rendered unclean from the outside! — The verse therefore reads: And every open vessel, which has no covering close-bound upon it, is unclean, that is to say, only with regard to this [is the distinction made, namely,] if it has no covering close-bound upon it it is unclean, and if it has a covering close-bound upon it it is clean; whereas all other vessels, whether they have or have not a covering close-bound upon them, are unclean. MISHNAH. THAT WHICH CANNOT BE RENDERED UNCLEAN IN WOODEN ARTICLES CAN BE RENDERED UNCLEAN IN METAL ARTICLES, AND THAT WHICH CANNOT BE RENDERED UNCLEAN IN METAL ARTICLES CAN BE RENDERED UNCLEAN IN WOODEN ARTICLES. GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: Unfinished wooden articles can be rendered unclean, but flat wooden articles cannot; unfinished metal articles cannot be rendered unclean, but flat metal articles can. It follows, therefore, that that which cannot be rendered unclean in wooden articles can be rendered unclean in metal articles, and that which cannot be rendered unclean in metal articles can be rendered unclean in wooden articles. The following wooden articles are regarded as unfinished: whatever still requires to be smoothed, or adorned with designs, or planed, or trimmed round, or polished with [the skin of a] tunny-fish. Whatever still lacks the base or the rim or the handle can be rendered unclean, but whatever still requires to be hollowed out cannot be rendered unclean. ‘Whatever still requires to be hollowed out’! But this is obvious! — It is necessary to be mentioned for the following case: where one hollowed out of [a block which was intended to hold] a Kab only as much as would hold a Kapiza. The following metal articles are regarded as unfinished: whatever still requires^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ

^ᵃnote:All the mustard seeds in the vessel are rendered unclean, even those which are in the center of the vessel. Now these latter become unclean only because they are in the air-space of an unclean earthenware vessel. It cannot be suggested that the seeds which touch the side of vessel convey uncleanness to those next to them, one seed conveying uncleanness to the other, and so on as far as the seeds in the center of the vessel, for the following reasons: (a) no foodstuff less than the size of an egg can convey uncleanness; (b) one foodstuff cannot convey uncleanness to another foodstuff; and (c) with unconsecrated food uncleanness can at the most be extended to the second degree, but no further. In our case, therefore, the vessel, being unclean in the first degree, would convey uncleanness by contact to the seeds next to it, and these would be unclean in the second degree and could not pass on the uncleanness to others even by contact.
^ᵇnote:Num. XIX, 15.
^ᶜnote:The fact that the verse specifically mentions ‘open’ suggests immediately that it is dealing with an earthen vessel which has a special rule concerning its ‘opening’ i.e., its air-space, for no other vessel can be rendered unclean or can convey uncleanness through its air-space.
^ᵈnote:Hence it is proved that an earthenware vessel cannot be rendered unclean from the outside.
^ᵉnote:Lev. XI, 33. Heb. ufu,, the air-space.
^ᶠnote:Sc. an earthenware vessel.
^ᵍnote:For the purposes of the analogy, v. supra 24b ad fin, p. 123.
^ʰnote:Actually the word ‘toko’ is mentioned twice in Lev. XI, 33, but it would have served the purpose of the text if in each case the word ‘tok’ was used. The addition to each word indicates further exposition.
^ⁱnote:Viz., that the air-space of un unclean earthenware vessel should render unclean foodstuffs or liquids which are within it.
^ʲnote:V. supra p. 123, n.5.
^ᵏnote:I.e., if a vessel containing foodstuffs or liquids is suspended in the airspace of an earthenware vessel in such a way that the rim of the inner vessel is above the rim of the outer vessel, and a reptile is suspended in the airspace between the two vessels, then the contents of the inner vessel are not unclean, for they are not regarded as being within the air-space of the earthenware vessel, but only within the air-space of a vessel which is itself within the air-space of the earthenware vessel. The inner vessel, in other words, is a protection against the uncleanness reaching its contents, and for this reason, viz., since a vessel-even one which can be rendered unclean by contact from the outside — cannot be rendered unclean if it comes within the air-space of an unclean earthenware vessel (v. Pes. 20a), its contents will be protected from uncleanness.
^ˡnote:I.e., all vessels except earthenware vessels. The former are called rinsable because, if unclean, they can be rendered clean by being rinsed in the waters of a mikweh.
^ᵐnote:Num. XIX, 15.
^ⁿnote:I.e., an earthenware vessel.
^ᵒnote:It follows therefore that all other vessels can be rendered unclean from the outside, seeing that the fact that these vessels have a covering close-bound upon them is no protection.
^ᵖnote:For wooden vessels do not contract uncleanness unless they contain a cavity.
^ᵠnote:For it is merely a flat piece of wood.
^ʳnote:A small measure equal to three logs; a Kab is a measure that holds four logs. In this case, since the wood was to be hollowed out in order to hold a Kab it is regarded as unfinished as long as this had not been done.

²to be smoothed, or adorned with designs, or planed, or trimmed round, or hammered out. Whatever still lacks the base or the rim or the handle, cannot be rendered unclean, but whatever only requires the lid can be rendered unclean. Why is there a difference between the one and the other? — R. Johanan said: Because these [metal vessels] are made for occasions of honour. R. Nahman said: Because they are expensive, What practical difference is there between them? — Bone vessels. And indeed R. Nahman is consistent in his view, for R. Nahman said: Bone vessels are regarded on the same footing as metal vessels. It appears then that bone vessels can be rendered unclean! — It is so; for it was taught: R. Ishmael, the son of R. Johanan b. Beroka says. What does the following verse teach us: And everything made from goats . . . ye shall purify? To include anything made from goats, either from the horns or from the hoofs. And whence do we know [that articles made from the horns or the hoofs] of other animals or beasts [are included]? From the words, ‘And everything made’. Why, then, is it written: ‘From goats’? To exclude [articles made from] birds. MISHNAH. WHEN BITTER ALMONDS ARE SUBJECT TO TITHING SWEET ALMONDS ARE EXEMPT, AND WHEN SWEET ALMONDS ARE SUBJECT TO TITHING BITTER ALMONDS ARE EXEMPT. GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: Small bitter almonds are subject to tithing, but the large are exempt; large sweet almonds are subject to tithing, but the small are exempt. R. Ishmael b. R. Jose says in the name of his father: Both are exempt. Others have the reading: Both are subject to tithing. R. Ila'a said that R. Hanina ruled in Sepphoris in accordance with the view of him who maintains that both are exempt. But according to him who maintains that both are subject to tithing [it will be asked]: What use can be made of large bitter almonds? — R. Johanan answered: They can surely be sweetened by [roasting in] the fire! MISHNAH. TAMAD BEFORE IT HAS FERMENTED MAY NOT BE BOUGHT WITH SECOND TITHE MONEY AND RENDERS A MIKWEH INVALID; AFTER IT HAS FERMENTED IT MAY BE BOUGHT WITH SECOND TITHE MONEY AND DOES NOT RENDER A MIKWEH INVALID. BROTHERS WHO ARE PARTNERS [IN THEIR INHERITANCE], WHEN THEY ARE LIABLE TO PAY THE AGIO, ARE EXEMPT FROM THE CATTLE TITHE, AND WHEN THEY ARE LIABLE TO THE CATTLE TITHE, THEY ARE EXEMPT FROM THE AGIO. GEMARA. Who is the author of our Mishnah? It is neither R. Judah nor the Rabbis! For we have learnt: If a man made Tamad putting in a certain measure of water, and he subsequently found the same measure of liquid, he is exempt from tithing it. R. Judah however, makes him liable. Now who is the author [of our Mishnah]? If the Rabbis, then even though it has fermented [it should not be purchasable with Second Tithe money], and if R. Judah, then even though it has not fermented at all [it should be purchasable with Second Tithe money]! — R. Nahman said, in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha,^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ^ᵃᵉ^ᵃᶠ^ᵃᵍ^ᵃʰ^ᵃⁱ^ᵃʲ^ᵃᵏ^ᵃˡ^ᵃᵐ^ᵃⁿ^ᵃᵒ

^ˢnote:Reading cfrfk; so MS.M. and also the ‘Aruch. In cur. edd. rfrfk, which, according to Rashi, means ‘to adorn with figures’.
^ᵗnote:Why is it that unfinished metal articles cannot be rendered unclean whereas unfinished wooden articles can?
^ᵘnote:Since metal vessels are reserved for use on special occasions they would not serve the purpose unless they were absolutely finished in all detail and decoration.
^ᵛnote:And they would not realize their price unless they were finished in every detail.
^ʷnote:These are expensive but are not used on special occasions of honour; consequently, according to R. Johanan unfinished bone vessels can be rendered unclean, but according to R. Nahman they cannot.
^ˣnote:Where is it indicated in the Torah?
^ʸnote:Num. XXXI, 20.
^ᶻnote:E.g., articles made from the claws of birds. These cannot be rendered unclean and therefore the law of purification does not apply.
^ᵃᵃnote:The test is edibility; therefore, large hitter almonds are exempt from tithing because they are not edible, whereas the small bitter ones before they are fully ripened are edible and so subject to tithing.
^ᵃᵇnote:In the case of sweet almonds, the small ones are exempt from tithing for they are not yet fully ripe.
^ᵃᶜnote:I.e., both sweet and bitter almonds when small are exempt from tithing (Rashi). According to R. Gershom and Tosaf the meaning is: Bitter almonds both large and small are exempt from tithing.
^ᵃᵈnote:I.e., both sweet and bitter almonds when large are subject to tithing (Rashi). According to A. Gershom and Tosaf. the meaning is: Bitter almonds both large and small are subject to tithing.
^ᵃᵉnote:sn,. An inferior wine made by steeping the kernels and skins of grapes in water, or by pouring water on to the lees of wine.
^ᵃᶠnote:Before fermentation has taken place it is merely water, and water may not be bought with Second Tithe money, v. ‘Er. 27b.
^ᵃᵍnote:A mikweh (i.e., a ritual bath) must be filled with waters which flow directly from a river or a stream or with rainwater, but not with waters which have been drawn from the rlver into vessels. An admixture of three logs or more of drawn water into a mikweh which does not contain the requisite amount of water (i.e., 40 se'ah) renders the mikweh invalid for all time. But an admixture of wine into a mikweh does not render it invalid.
^ᵃʰnote:For it is regarded as wine.
^ᵃⁱnote:Heb. iucke from Greek **. This was a small coin which every person had to add to his annual contribution of a half-shekel to the Temple in order to compensate the Temple Treasury for the loss it might sustain on exchanging the half-shekel for other coinage. It was not permissible for two people to evade this additional payment by combining and paying one shekel between them. On the other hand, this law of agio was relaxed in favour of a person who paid the half-shekel on behalf of another by way of gift to that other person; and therefore, if a father paid a whole shekel on behalf of his two sons by way of gift to them, he was not liable to pay any agio at all. In the case of our Mishnah the circumstances are that the brothers had divided the inheritance on the death of their father and subsequently entered into partnership; consequently each one must pay the agio when contributing his half-shekel even though they pay one whole shekel jointly, in the same way as when two people pay together one whole shekel.
^ᵃʲnote:Cf. Lev. XXVII, 32. In Bek. 56b it is laid down that cattle born to partnership stock is exempt from the tithe.
^ᵃᵏnote:I.e., if they had never divided the inheritance. In this case it is held that cattle born to the partnership stock is subject to the tithe, for it is deemed in law to be the deceased father's stock.
^ᵃˡnote:Since the inheritance had never been divided the combined contribution of one shekel which they make is regarded as a payment made by a father by way of gift in respect of his two sons, and in these circumstances they are exempt from the agio. V. p. 128, n. 7.
^ᵃᵐnote:For it is regarded as water, even though its taste may be that of wine, since there is here no increase in the mixture. V. Ma'as. V, 6. It is assumed for the present that such considerations, as to whether the mixture has fermented or not, are of no consequence.
^ᵃⁿnote:For it is regarded as fruit juice.
^ᵃᵒnote:It is assumed that the Tamad of our Mishnah had not 1ncreased at all but the whole of it measured exactly the same as the quantity of water that was put in.